Archive for the ‘Socialism’ Category

Come to Socialism 2017 – Socialist Party

Home | The Socialist 23 August 2017 | Join the Socialist Party

Subscribe | Donate | Audio| PDF| ebook

Rally for Socialism 2016, photo Paul Mattsson (Click to enlarge)

Socialism 2017 takes place on 11 and 12 November. It is a weekend of discussion and debate with a choice of over 40 workshops and rallies.

Keynote speakers include Socialist Party general secretary Peter Taaffe, author of From Militant to the Socialist Party; Corbynista MP Ian Mearns; Seattle socialist Kshama Sawant who led the US's first successful battle for a $15 an hour minimum wage; Irish socialist MP Paul Murphy fresh from an attempt to criminalise him for effective protesting; and Hannah Sell, Socialist Party deputy general secretary and regular contributor to the Socialist Party's monthly magazine Socialism Today.

There will be time during every workshop for everyone to have a say, to raise questions, propose points of difference, or expand on aspects of the discussion.

We welcome this as discussion and debate brings clarification for all our understanding of the complex world we live in, the lessons from past struggles and the programme we need to fight for socialism today.

At Socialism 2017 we will discuss the Russian Revolution 100 years ago. 1917 provides a powerful example of how it is possible for the working class and poor to take their destiny into their own hands and transform the world.

We will be discussing the impact of the revolution and why the Soviet Union degenerated into dictatorship. But Socialism 2017 will not be a history lesson! It is focused on the burning questions our movements face.

Socialism 2017 will bring together working class fighters, trade unionists and youth and student activists, anti-cuts campaigners, those who want to find out about socialism and Marxism, and people who want to change the world, for a weekend of discussion and debate on the alternative to capitalist crisis.

How can we get rid of the Tories? When will police and institutional racism end? Will a Jeremy Corbyn government be undermined by the Blairites? Can workers fight low pay? What about the trade union leaders who don't want to fight?

What happened to the socialist movement in Venezuela? How can we prevent Trump from delivering World War III? What really happened in the 1917 Russian Revolution?

What do we do about media bias? After Grenfell, how can we end the scandal of private profiteering? Can we win the right to free education?

If these are the questions you are asking then, a) you are not alone, and b) Socialism 2017 is the event for you.

It will be the political event of the year, celebrating the anniversary of the 1917 Russian Revolution, hearing from workers and socialists in struggle around the world

Continued here:
Come to Socialism 2017 - Socialist Party

Baltimore’s Christopher Columbus monument vandalized (for socialism) – Hot Air

This morning someone posted a video showing a man with a sledgehammer vandalizing a monument to Christopher Columbus in Baltimore as he rants about genocidal terrorists like Christopher Columbus and George Washington. The Baltimore Brew reports the 225-year-oldmonument to Columbus is the oldest one still standing in the United States.

The two-minute video also features a monologue that lists capitalism among Columbus worst sins. Christopher Columbus symbolizes the initial invasion of European capitalism into the Western Hemisphere, the narrator says. He continues, Columbus initiated a centuries-old wave of terrorism, murder, genocide, rape, slavery, ecological degradation and capitalist exploitation of labor in the Americas.

The culture of white supremacy preceded the United States. Its at the foundation of U.S. culture, business, bureaucracies, and psychology. Observe how vehemently Republican and Democratic misleaders defend genocidal terrorists like Christopher Columbus and George Washington.

Christopher Columbus has become an increasingly polarizing figure over the lasttwo decades. Those who think his history deserves more criticism and less celebration have the right to make that case. In the past few years, a growing number of cities have renamed Columbus Day as Indigenous Peoples Day so its not as if there has been no movement on this issue.

Just yesterday a handful of people in Columbus, Ohio gathered to demand the removal of a Columbus statue at city hall. Thats how this ought to work. You get like-minded people together and make your case to your elected representatives.Smashing things with a sledgehammer in the middle of the night is not what democracy looks like.

Read more here:
Baltimore's Christopher Columbus monument vandalized (for socialism) - Hot Air

Socialism, fascist-style: hostility to capitalism plus extreme racism – The Guardian

A far-right demonstrator in Charlottesville. For the new wave of national socialists, socialism means kicking out immigrants, sequestering black people, and establishing an authoritarian state. Photograph: Steve Helber/AP

The groups that marched through Charlottesville last weekend with clubs, shields and cans of mace were clearly drawn from the most extreme and violent end of Americas far right. But key elements of the ideology of at least some of them echo themes that have animated populist groups across the political spectrum, including on the left.

In their chants and placards, the marchers were explicitly fascist, racist and antisemitic. One of their number is accused of murdering a leftwing activist with his car and injuring many more. They came prepared to do violence to leftists, whom they consider to be existential enemies. They werent shy about any of this, and the event was the crest of an extremist wave that has been swelling since well before Donald Trumps inauguration.

But at the same time, some of the groups that marched evince a hostility to neoliberal capitalism, which is equal to that of the most ardent supporters of Bernie Sanders, the leftwing populist who mounted a vigorous challenge to Hillary Clinton during last years Democratic primaries although for the far right it comes inextricably linked to a virulent racism. Many also support the enhancement of the welfare state.

For example, those marching under the red and blue banners of the National Socialist Movement (NSM) have signed up to a manifesto that supports a living wage, sweeping improvements in healthcare, an end to sales taxes on things of lifes necessity and land reform for affordable housing.

An establishing principle in the document written by their leader, Jeff Schoep, is that the state shall make it its primary duty to provide a livelihood for its citizens. It calls for the nationalisation of all businesses which have been formed into corporations.

The manifesto of Matthew Heimbachs Traditionalist Worker Party calls for opportunities for workers to have jobs with justice. And in a manifesto issued on the day of the Charlottesville march, the noted far-right figurehead Richard Spencer wrote that the interests of businessmen and global merchants should never take precedence over the wellbeing of workers, families, and the natural world.

Spencer has previously spoken out including at the American Renaissance conference, a gathering of far-right activists in Nashville in July in favour of single payer universal healthcare.

At the conference, Spencer gave Trump just three out of 10 when invited to rate him because he was too focused on the Republican agenda of tax cuts and dismantling Obamacare.

These critiques of capitalism and mainstream conservatism are key to the socialist element of national socialism. Observers of the far right argue that understanding this is essential to demystifying the far rights appeal, especially to the alienated millennial men currently swelling its ranks.

Matthew Lyons is a researcher into far-right movements, and the author of one book on rightwing populism in the US, and another, recently published, on the alt-right. He argues that a lot of the socialist content in the ideology of movements such as the NSM is vague, and is at one level a prime example of how the far right takes elements of leftist politics and appropriates them for their own purposes.

But he adds that there is a broad hostility to an idea of the capitalist ruling class, within a notion of capitalism centred on stereotypes of Jews.

He talks of a long tradition in Nazism and other parts of the far right of drawing a distinction between finance capital and industrial capital, with the former, identified with Jews, being seen as parasitic.

This identification is apparent on the web pages of NSM, and until the site was purged from the internet on the website of Vanguard America, the group with which the alleged murderer James Fields marched in Charlottesville.

Jewish finance is consistently nominated as the principal enemy of these groups. Lyons explains that this distinction is an antisemitic variant on the ideology of producerism, which is common across the populist right and privileges the makers of tangible things over those engaged in more abstract pursuits. They define industrial capitalists as good capitalists, or even as workers, he says, adding that this was how the noted antisemite Henry Ford described his role at the head of a giant auto manufacturer.

So there is a notion of class conflict, and even a revolutionary perspective, says Lyons. But the society they plan to build on the wreckage of the one they overturn will be constructed for the benefit of whites.

Their socialism, explains Lyons is not universalist. It rejects any notion of an international working class. In their utopia, the state would only be used to tend to the needs of white people. And many groups also reject the idea of equality even among whites.

Alexander Reid Ross is the author of Against the Fascist Creep, a sweeping history of fascism from the early 20th century to the present. He argues that while contemporary fascists try to make nationalism palatable for the working class, ultimately what they envision has nothing to do with socialism; its absolutely inegalitarian.

He also points to the historical example of fascist states during the inter-war period, where workers lived on less food, received lower wages for working longer hours, and enjoyed no collective bargaining rights, and then were fed into the meat grinder of the second world war.

Similarly, for the new wave of national socialists, Ross says, socialism means kicking out immigrants, sequestering black people, and establishing an authoritarian state within which they can live out their fantasies.

Implicitly and explicitly, they offer a critique of the free market capitalism that has been recent conservative orthodoxy throughout the developed west.

Shane Burley, researcher and author of a forthcoming book, Fascism Today: What it Is and How to End It, says: What they want is a situation where the economy is not left up to the free market where it is instead under the control of an elite.

He points out that the trend of mobilising socialist ideas and rhetoric really dates back to the Strasserite section of the Nazis, and helped pull support from areas that would normally go to the far left. It would be a socialism that retains hierarchy, where classes are determined by God or science.

A preoccupation with the source of inequality was on display at Julys American Renaissance conference, where speakers flourished IQ data, and even images of different-sized brains, in their accounts of the reason for social divides. There, and at other alt-right events this year, it has been evident that these views are very attractive to a particular slice of young, millennial men.

In Charlottesville, hundreds marched sporting white polo shirts and distinctive, undercut fashy haircuts. At the Nashville conference, they made up half the crowd. In the breaks between speakers, many sought out Spencer to take candid selfies.

Ross said that in the unresolved aftermath of the 2008 economic crisis, those seeking out fascist groups resemble those of the interwar period: veterans who are pissed off about the way that society treats them; and an educated strata who dont feel they can find a place in the current economy.

Observers argue that Trumps campaign rhetoric runs parallel to the racialised economic populism of the far right, and opened up a space in which they can proselytise.

Lyons says that as president, Trump has mostly pursued a familiar conservative agenda, but as a candidate, his platform of protectionism and xenophobic economic nationalism marked out the place where civic and racial nationalism coincide.

In the wake of the Charlottesville protests, and as Trumps presidency continues to melt down, it remains to be seen whether socialism, fascist-style, will retain its allure for so many resentful, violent young men.

See the rest here:
Socialism, fascist-style: hostility to capitalism plus extreme racism - The Guardian

Letter to the Editor: Our yearn for socialism will kill us – Carolinacoastonline

Harlowe, N.C.

Aug. 16, 2017

TO THE EDITOR:

This great nation, the United States of America, is well on its way to becoming a communist/socialist nation. Its following in the footsteps of Hitlers Germany and Maos China.

They first took over the youth in those countries. Hitler took the children from their parents when the children were 4-years-old. They put them in special training schools where they were taught communistic ways, which in theory is a system of the ownership of all property by the community as a whole or under one control.

They gave the children back to their parents when the children were 12-years-old. By that time, their thoughts and habits of life were set in stone. The children rebelled against their parents and all authority that did not conform to communism.

Then they destroyed all statues that showed honor to past heroes who gave their lives to the founding of those countries. Then they destroyed all history books that showed how the countries were established and they replaced the books with those teaching communism.

I dont know what is being taught in kindergarten through 12th grade in our schools, but I do know that 98% of what is being taught by our college professors in socialism. In theory, socialism is the ownership, operation, production and distribution by society rather than by private individuals.

Both socialism and communism destroy and put an end to all values that the people of this great nation had long fought and died for. They kill the ambitions and individual pride in self accomplishments, uniqueness and independent nature of its citizens. During both Hitlers and Maos first year in power, they destroyed millions of their own people.

If socialism and communism are so great, why are so many people who live under those conditions tearing down walls to come and live in the United States?

I am 89-years-old and I have predicted that this unrest in this country, by people who have lost the values of their parents and forefathers, would one day destroy this country. I didnt think that it would happen during my lifetime, but with todays movement in this country, Im not so sure that it wont happen during my lifetime.

To the youth and unrest in this country: Be careful what you wish for; it may come back to haunt you.

BETTY WARD MOTES

Continued here:
Letter to the Editor: Our yearn for socialism will kill us - Carolinacoastonline

Socialist mode of production – Wikipedia

In Marxist theory, socialism, also called the socialist mode of production, refers to a specific historical phase of economic development and its corresponding set of social relations that supersede capitalism in the schema of historical materialism. The Marxist definition of socialism is a mode of production where the sole criterion for production is use-value and therefore the law of value no longer directs economic activity. Marxist production for use is coordinated through conscious economic planning, while distribution of economic output is based on the principle of to each according to his contribution. The social relations of socialism are characterized by the working class effectively owning the means of production and the means of their livelihood, either through cooperative enterprises or by public ownership or private artisanal tools and self-management, so that the social surplus accrues to the working class and society as a whole.[1]

This view is consistent with, and helped to inform, early conceptions of socialism where the law of value no longer directs economic activity, and thus monetary relations in the form of exchange-value, profit, interest and wage labor would not operate and apply to Marxist socialism.[2]

The Marxian conception of socialism stands in contrast to other early conceptions of socialism, most notably early forms of market socialism based on classical economics such as mutualism and Ricardian socialism. Unlike the Marxian conception, these conceptions of socialism retained commodity exchange (markets) for labor and the means of production, seeking to perfect the market process.[3] The Marxist idea of socialism was also heavily opposed to utopian socialism.

Although Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote very little on socialism and neglected to provide any details on how it might be organized,[4] numerous social scientists and neoclassical economists have used Marx's theory as a basis for developing their own models of socialist economic systems. The Marxist view of socialism served as a point of reference during the socialist calculation debate.

Socialism is a post-commodity economic system, meaning that production is carried out to directly produce use-value (to directly satisfy human needs, or economic demands) as opposed to being produced with a view to generating a profit. The stage in which the accumulation of capital was viable and effective is rendered insufficient at the socialist stage of social and economic development, leading to a situation where production is carried out independently of capital accumulation in a supposedly planned fashion. Although Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels understood planning to involve the input and decisions of the individuals involved at localized levels of production and consumption, planning has been interpreted to mean centralized planning by Marxist-Leninists during the 20th century. However, there have been other conceptions of economic planning, including decentralized-planning and participatory planning.

In contrast to capitalism, which relies upon the coercive market forces to compel capitalists to produce use-values as a byproduct of the pursuit of profit, socialist production is to be based on the rational planning of use-values and coordinated investment decisions to attain economic goals.[5] As a result, the cyclical fluctuations that occur in a capitalist market economy will not be present in a socialist economy. The value of a good in socialism is its physical utility rather than its embodied labor, cost of production and exchange value as in a capitalist system.

Socialism would make use of incentive-based systems, and inequality would still exist but to a diminishing extent as all members of society would be worker-owners. This eliminates the severity of previous tendencies towards inequality and conflicts arising over ownership of the means of production and property income accruing to a small class of owners.[6] The method of compensation and reward in a socialist society would be based on an authentic meritocracy, along the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution".[7]

The advanced stage of socialism, referred to as "upper-stage communism" in the Critique of the Gotha Programme, is based on the socialist mode of production but is differentiated from lower-stage socialism in a few fundamental ways. While socialism implies public ownership (by a state apparatus) or cooperative ownership (by a worker cooperative enterprise), communism would be based on common ownership of the means of production. Class distinctions based on ownership of capital cease to exist, along with the need for a state. A superabundance of goods and services are made possible by automated production that allow for goods to be distributed based on need rather than merit.[8]

The period in which capitalism becomes increasingly insufficient as an economic system and immediately after the proletarian conquest of the state, an economic system that features elements of both socialism and capitalism will probably exist until both the productive forces of the economy and the cultural and social attitudes develop to a point where they satisfy the requirements for a full socialist society (one that has lost the need for monetary value, wage labor and capital accumulation). Specifically, market relations will still exist but economic units are either nationalized or re-organized into cooperatives. This transitional phase is sometimes described as "state capitalism" or "market socialism". China is officially in the primary stage of socialism.

The fundamental goal of socialism from the view of Marx and Engels was the realization of human freedom and individual autonomy. Specifically, this refers to freedom from the alienation imposed upon individuals in the form of coercive social relationships as well as material scarcity, whereby the individual is compelled to engage in activities merely to survive (to reproduce his or herself). The aim of socialism is to provide an environment whereby individuals are free to express their genuine interests, creative freedom, and desires unhindered by forms of social control that force individuals to work for a class of owners who expropriate and live off the surplus product.[9]

As a set of social relationships, socialism is defined by the degree to which economic activity in society is planned by the associated producers, so that the surplus product produced by socialized assets is controlled by a majority of the population through democratic processes. The sale of labor power would be abolished so that every individual participates in running their institution as stakeholders or members with no one having coercive power over anyone else in a vertical social division of labor (which is to be distinguished from a non-social, technical division of labor which would still exist in socialism).[10] The incentive structure changes in a socialist society given the change in the social environment, so that an individual laborers' work becomes increasingly autonomous and creative, creating a sense of responsibility for his or her institution as a stakeholder.

In Marxist theory, the state is "the institution of organised violence which is used by the ruling class of a country to maintain the conditions of its rule. Thus, it is only in a society which is divided between hostile social classes that the state exists."[11] The state is thus seen as a mechanism that is dominated by the interests of the ruling class and utilized to subjugate other classes in order to protect and legitimize the existing economic system.

After a workers' revolution, the state would initially become the instrument of the working class. Conquest of the state apparatus by the working class must take place to establish a socialist system. As socialism is built, the role and scope of the state changes as class distinctions (based on ownership of the means of production) gradually deteriorate due to the concentration of means of production in state hands. From the point where all means of production become state property, the nature and primary function of the state would change from one of political rule (via coercion) over men by the creation and enforcement of laws into a scientific administration of things and a direction of processes of production; that is the state would become a coordinating economic entity rather than a mechanism of class or political control, and would no longer be a state in the Marxian sense.[12]

Read the original:
Socialist mode of production - Wikipedia